Berkeley CSUA MOTD:2008:July:18 Friday <Thursday, Saturday>
Berkeley CSUA MOTD
2008/7/18 [Politics/Domestic/Election] UID:50613 Activity:moderate 85%like:50625
7/18    BUD DAY: "The Muslims are going to kill us."
        \_ BUD DAY doesn't appreciate your tone.
2008/7/18 [Politics/Domestic/Election] UID:50614 Activity:nil 88%like:50626
7/18    McCain violates OPSEC
2008/7/18-23 [Reference/Military] UID:50615 Activity:nil
7/18    I love guns, but only old guns. I'd love to try out muskets, you
        know, those things that won us our freedom. I'd also love to try out
        Washington era canons, those that were used to scare off the bloody
        reds. Where can I go to shoot muskets and canons?
        \_ Civil war re-enactments.
        \_ There's an antique store, I think it's called Sergent's Surplus
           or something in Oakland? I have no idea what the legality is
           wrt to owning an antique ball/musket load weapon, I'm guessing
           you're not really required to register since it's so hard to
           kill someone with it. I mean, who wants to carry black powder,
           flint, loader, balls, etc etc? It's a drag!
           \_ A lot of people hunt with muzzle loaders.  Typically there are
              separate licensing requirements.
           \_ Yeah, they really make drivebys inconvenient. Thank Jesus the
              supreme court has upheld our God-given rights to have assault
              rifles instead.
2008/7/18-23 [Academia/Berkeley/CSUA/Troll/Aspolito] UID:50616 Activity:nil
7/18    At least he knows what he wants (NSFW):
        \_ Hello tawei!
        \_ This is really funny, NSFW though.
           \_ Whoops! You're right, so noted. -op
              \_ aspolito, when did you discover that you liked being
                 sodomized? can i sodomize you?
                 \_ You got the wrong person buddy.  Oh and I'm pretty sure
                    the answer is no, but if you want send me a picture I'll
                    keep the offer in mind. -aspo
2008/7/18-23 [Reference/Military] UID:50617 Activity:nil
7/18    Heller wins SCOTUS, DC still refuses to register his handgun
        \_ "A spokesman for the DC Police says the gun was a bottom-loading
            weapon, and according to their interpretation, all bottom-loading
            guns are outlawed because they are grouped with machine guns."
           Apart from revolvers, chain-ammo-fed MGs/Gatling Guns, and top-
           loaded sniper rifles, what guns are _not_ bottom-loading? Muskets?
           \_ Shotguns?
              \_ Pump action shotguns load from bottom.
               \_ The one I used loaded from the side.
           \_ So, a semi-auto is OK if you hold in gangsta' style?
           \_ hunting rifles?
              \_ Most hunting rifles are semi-automatic, and use a magazine.
                 Even bolt-action rifles often load from a magazine.
                 \_ shrug, I'm going with image results from what google
                    returns for "hunting rifle"
                    \_ Yes, most of those rifles use a magazine.
           \_ ?
2008/7/18-23 [Science/Battery, Computer/Companies/Apple] UID:50618 Activity:nil
7/18    iPhone battery life SUCKS. You'll probably have to spend another
        $100 in a year to get it replaced. Here's a cheap way to do it: (3G sucks,
                literally. Sucks up 25% more power)
        \_ no kidding.
2008/7/18-23 [Reference/BayArea] UID:50619 Activity:low
7/18    San Francisco, America's most walkable city: (SF Gate)
        \_ There's no way it's more walkable than Manhatten.
           \_ Manhattan is not a city.
            \_ You ever live there?  Comparing SF to all the boroughs is
               bullshit.  Maybe if you want to include Alameda county and
               south down to oh, maybe Sunnyvale?
               \_ It may be bullshit, but that's how the definition works.
                  Argue with the authors, not the posters. -!op|pp
                  \_ If someone creates a bullshit stat you should ignore it.
                     SF is very walkable and is a great city, but using "city"
                     is broken if it doesn't let you count Manhatten without,
                     say, Staten Island.  (Here's a hint, you address letters
                     to NYC residents and put the borough name where the city
                     goes.  Each borough has a "Borough Hall" ala city hall.
                     Each borough is a seperate county, in CA that can't happen
                     in one city.  They are pretty damn close to cities.)
                     \_ And yet not cities. New Yorkers want NYC to be a
                        single city when counting things like population
                        and separate cities when it is convenient to treat
                        it like so.
                     \_ I can address a letter to "Venice Beach" and it
                        gets there, but no one would think of VB as
                        anything but a neighborhood of LA.
           \_ I actually think it is, if you include the effect of weather,
              which the publishers did not. It is often too hot or too cold
              to really walk in Manhattan, almost never true in SF.
              \_ Good point about weather, but I've been in SF plenty of
                 times where it was too cold to walk. SF is a freezing
                 cold city with lots of wind, hence Mark Twain's quote.
                 Not as cold as NYC or Boston, but not exactly San Diego.
                 \_ Dude, you are a wuss. It never even gets below freezing
                    in San Francisco. Just wear a jacket. It can suck to
                    walk in the rain though, especially when the wind is
                    blowing, but that is 30 days or less out of the
                    \_ Bone chilling wind is often worse than snow.
                 \_ The quote is misattributed to Twain.
        \_ Once again, why would you want to walk with a bunch of smelly
           homeless, drug dealers, and hippies?
           \_ Once again, you don't know shit about San Francisco.
              \_ I know enough that I'd rather live in a nice suburb than
                 in the city.
                 \_ You live in a nice walkable suburb? Which one? How
                    many times have you even been in San Francisco?
                    \_ Why do you have to walk to enjoy life?   -op
                    \_ I'd say Berkeley is a nice walkable suburb. Well,
                       a walkable suburb anyway.
        \_ The bottom 5 cities still score higher than the most walkable
           cities in Orange County. Irvine, for example.
        \_ They didn't take hills into account.  Or crime or panhandling.
         \_ Crime is pretty damn low in SF, and panhandling is pretty
            ignorable.  I'll give you that if you have to walk through
            someplace like nob hill that the hills really do suck.
            \_ Crime in SF is low compared to come cities, but in terms of
               crimes committed per 100,000 people it is higher than the
               national average for murder, robbery, assault, burglary,
               theft, and auto theft. It is lower in number of rapes.
               Comparing directly to Los Angeles, SF has a lot more
               robberies, burglaries, and thefts. It has fewer assaults
               and rapes. Murder rate is almost the same. That's got to
               burst your bubble of viewing SF as being "safe" because I live
               in LA and I would never call it "safe". For fun, I compared
               SF to NYC:
               Surprisingly (?), NYC is far more safe than SF.
               \_ If you lived here, you would know that the overwhelming
                  majority of crime in SF happens south of 280, which is
                  an area most people avoid, if they even know it exits
                  at all. Most of the rest happens in the Mission and the
                  Tenderloin, so it is very easy to avoid the small high
                  crime neighborhoods, if you are so inclinded. Auto theft
                  happens everywhere, but this does not effect walking.
                  \_ Crime only happens in the bad areas. Well, duh. "Safe"
                     cities don't *HAVE* those really bad areas. That's
                     why they are "safe" - unlike San Francisco, which has
                     some really bad areas that are still considered part
                     of San Francisco even though I'm sure you think no
                     one from those areas ever leaves them for any reason.
                     You don't think NYC has bad areas, too? And yet it's
                     much safer than SF.
                     \_ Every city in the US has some high crime areas.
                     \_ Every big city in the US has some high crime areas.
                        Currently, NYC is doing a great job of combatting
                        crime, and I have to give them credit for that.
                        This is a relatively new phenomenea.
                        This is a relatively new phenomena.
                        \_ It is. However, SF is still above the national
                           average in terms of crime and you can't
                           cherrypick the nice areas to say otherwise. We
                           could cherrypick the nice areas of every city
                           if it worked that way.
2008/7/18-23 [Politics/Domestic/California, Politics/Domestic/President/Reagan] UID:50620 Activity:nil 54%like:50612
7/17    More hypocrisy from Al Gore
        [Promo/hit piece from Americans for Prosperity]
        \_ It's pretty tough being Al Gore. On one hand, he wants to get
           his message across. On the other hand, it is extremely difficult
           to get his message across without violating his messages. On
           one hand, I'd wish he would bike to conferences using a single
           speed bicycle and wearing spandex. On the other hand, no one
           really listens to hippies dressed in tie dye shirts shouting
           "Global warming is here! Conserve!" Tough position man. What
           would you do in his position?
        \_ "This video is no longer available"
            \_ works fine for me
        \_ has a picture of RONALD REAGAN
           Oh yeah this is a GREAT message and a GREAT site RONNIE is
           our GREAT HERO YES VOTE CONSERVATIVES NOW! Patriots unite!!!
           \_ Translation: I feel really stupid for supporting this hypocrite,
              ad hominem time!
        \_ You're a conservative, why do you care what other people do
           with their lives? As long as you are eco-conscious or can
           help others become more eco-conscious, what do you care?
           \_ Mainly just because it's annoying to have some hypocrite
              harranging you. -!op
           \_ Al Gore is trying to get policies enacted to force me to act in
              a way that he himself doesn't.  It's clear that he doesn't
              actually believe in his global warming hoax since he doesn't even
              do a thing to live like he tries to tell the rest of us to live.
        \_ WWAGD. Bwahaha
        \_ Al Gore is 10 times the leader that Dubya is. Too bad the Supreme
           Court selected Bush.
2008/7/18-19 [Uncategorized] UID:50621 Activity:low
7/18    What's the best way to tell your parents that you're gay and you
        love getting loved in the ass?
        \_ The former: straightforwardly.
           The latter: none of their business.
        \_ "Oh Daddy, can you come hold my wet slippery body in the shower
           while I look for the bar soap that I just dropped?  And tell mom to
           take a hike."
           \_ Gaybaiting? No, seriously, you're gaybaiting on the motd? WTF
              is wrong with you?
2008/7/18 [Science/Biology] UID:50622 Activity:nil 100%like:50624
7/18    Krauthammer hammers Intelligent Design
2008/7/18-23 [Uncategorized] UID:50623 Activity:nil
7/18    Hey dim, what do you think about survival of the fittest? Darwin?
        Good? Bad? Just part of life and try your best?
2008/7/18-23 [Science/Biology] UID:50624 Activity:nil 100%like:50622
7/18    Krauthammer hammers Intelligent Design [wp]
2008/7/18-23 [Politics/Domestic/Election] UID:50625 Activity:nil 85%like:50613
7/18    BUD DAY: "The Muslims are going to kill us." [miami herald]
        \_ BUD DAY doesn't appreciate your tone.
2008/7/18-23 [Politics/Domestic/Election] UID:50626 Activity:nil 88%like:50614
7/18    McCain violates OPSEC [tpm]
2008/7/18-23 [Politics/Domestic/California, Politics/Domestic/California/Arnold] UID:50627 Activity:moderate
7/18    California state government spent $145 billion last fiscal year, $41
        billion more than four years ago when Gov. Gray Davis got recalled by
        voters.  With all that new spending -- a whopping 40% increase -- we
        ought to be in a golden age of government with abundant public services
        for all.,0,7957570.story
        \_ same flawed assumption as before; using the CPI as the
           measure for inflation is wrong, because both salaries and
           real estate costs in the state (not just in the public
           sector) have risen far faster than CPI inflation in the past 10
           years.  -tom
           \_ Just look at the nominal values.
              \_ nominal values of what?
           \_ Which means exactly zero. You're saying that the adjusted numbers
              aren't adjusted enough. Or that the rich should be getting soaked
              more.  The point remains that the state spending has increased by
              a huge amount in a short time. The whining about the budget is
              ridiculous, especially considering that the proposed budget will
              still increase next year--mostly by stealing from other funds and
              raising taxes:
              \_ Yes, I'm saying that the adjusted numbers aren't adjusted
                 enough.  State spending has increased by a huge amount in
                 a short time *because of inflation*; it has not increased
                 by a huge amount relative to the cost of doing business
                 in California.  Actually I would expect that, except for
                 the prison sector, real state  expenditures relative to
                 California-indexed prices are flat or down over the past
                 4 or 10 years.  -tom
                 \_ Since you don't believe the published numbers, you'll just
                    pull them out of your ass!
                    \_ What are the published numbers for California?  -tom
                 \_ High real estate costs don't much affect State spending
                    and I doubt even State salaries are up 40% in 4 years.
                    \_ Real estate is absolutely a major cost to the
                       state.  So are fuel and energy.  State
                       \_ I doubt it much impacts operations. How much
                          real estate does the State buy after all -
                          especially residential real estate, which is
                          where the bubble was? You'll have a hard time
                          arguing 40% over 4 years undersells the State's
                          real estate cost inflation. By the way, every
                          business in CA has done business in the same
                          inflationary environment. How many have increased
                          spending 40% in the last 4 years? I know my
                          employer hasn't. More like 5% per year which is
                          about 23% over 4 years. Inflation hasn't been
                          40% over the last 4 years.
                          \_ California's gross state product is up over 40%
                             since 2000, so clearly business spending has
                             increased by at least that much.  I wasn't
                             able to find 2002 numbers, but given the dot-com
                             crash, I'm sure it didn't increase much from
                             2000-2002.  -tom
                             \_ What is your source, I can use it in my
                                next debate with a net.libertarian. -ausman
                             \_ Big difference betweeen 40% since 2000 and
                             \_ Big difference between 40% since 2000 and
                                40% over the last 4 years. Here are the
                                GDP numbers, BTW (in millions of current $):
                                2000 1,287,145
                                2001 1,301,050
                                2002 1,340,446
                                2003 1,406,511
                                2004 1,519,443
                                2005 1,632,822
                                2006 1,742,172
                                2007 1,812,968
                                So California GDP is up ~40% over 7 years.
                                Since 2004 it is up 19%.
                                \_ This is an awesome data source (and is
                                   a pretty strong argument that The State
                                   is spending more), thanks. Aren't classroom
                                   sizes smaller these days?
                       So are fuel and energy.  State
                       population is up over 7% since 2000, which
                       represents an absolute baseline for spending
                       increase.  Median household income rose from
                       $46K in 2000 to $54K in 2006.  And by
                       cherry-picking a 4-year period, you're ignoring
                       the fact that there were state budget cuts the
                       three prior years.
                       \_ And you're ignoring that the state was still deficit
                          spending in those years.
                          \_ So?  They still had to defer all kinds of
                             expenses.  -tom
                             \_ So. What?  The state shouldn't be spending more
                                than it takes in. Period.
                                \_ Why not?  Pretty much every business and
                                   family spends more than it takes in, at
                                   least occasionally.  -tom
        \_ Time to recall the Governator!
           \_ I'd be for that in a heartbeat. -op
2008/7/18-23 [Politics/Domestic, Politics/Domestic/SocialSecurity] UID:50628 Activity:low
7/18    Best caption evar!
        \_ the "Enlarge" link is pretty good, too.
           \_ Totally appropriate. However I'm a liberal and I'm suppose
              to feel sorry for these guys and I'm suppose to want to
              get our government to mandate exercise for those who are
              obese. On the other hand, I don't feel sorry for them.
              What is wrong with me?                    -liberal
              \_ Being fat cows may largely be genetic, but spending
                 $350/mo they spend on food and electricity?
                 $350/mo on food and electricity?
                 \_ Huh? Where do you get $350?
              \_ No, wanting the government to mandate exercise if fascist, not
                 liberal--unless the two terms are the same.
        \_ Are you one of those Compassionate Conservatives I keep hearing
        \_ Food in general is obviously not out of reach enough
2019/06/18 [General] UID:1000 Activity:popular
Berkeley CSUA MOTD:2008:July:18 Friday <Thursday, Saturday>